RPT-US to propose labeling greenhouse gases from cars

Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:13pm EDT

(Repeats with no changes to text)

WASHINGTON Aug 30 (Reuters) - The United States will propose on Monday new labels for passenger vehicles detailing for the first time their greenhouse gas emissions, while also changing measurements of fuel economy.

The labeling proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation would allow consumers to compare cars in terms of emissions blamed for warming the planet and to see how far they could drive on new technologies and traditional gasoline engines.

"New fuel economy labels will keep pace with the new generation of fuel efficient cars and trucks rolling off the line, and provide simple, straightforward updates to inform consumers about their choices in a rapidly changing market," EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a release.

The labels would include comparisons across all types of vehicles including electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid cars.

The EPA and the DOT will propose two label designs for comment.

One label design features a letter grade to communicate the vehicle's overall fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions performance. The new design will also provide consumers with an estimate of the expected fuel cost savings over five years compared to an average gasoline-powered vehicle of the same model year, the EPA said.

In April, the EPA finalized first national limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars and light trucks and the Department of Transportation strengthened fuel economy standards for model year 2012 to 2016 passenger vehicles.

The efficiency rules required that cars and light trucks get on average 35.5 miles per gallon (15 kilometers per liter) by 2016, up 42 percent from current rules.

U.S. passenger vehicles discharge about 20 percent of the country's heat-trapping gases and consume about 44 percent of its oil.

One environmentalist said the new labels would help consumers decide, which cars are right for them.

"Truth in labeling empowers Americans to make informed real world choices that save our families money, reduce our dependence on oil, and cut heat-trapping greenhouse gases," said Vickie Patton, the general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund.

The EPA and DOT are providing a 60-day public comment period after they publish the proposal in the Federal Register. (Reporting by Timothy Gardner; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
Ying-Yang wrote:
40% increase in efficiency in 5 years? NO WAY. Don’t they realize it takes 5 years to design and bring any car to market; so they need to STOP everything to get that done on time IF they have the technology figured out now. Ok that’s painfully possible, but what inexpensive technology do they expect to use? Hybrids, Fuel cell, and pure electric technology is still expensive and/or experimental. Hybrids are (at this time) the most likely to be viable now, but they do not even come close to 40% better in efficiency (per vehicle class and size). Just another well placed shot in our strong economy. Now that our car companies have dug themselves out of the slump, lets make them throw away every new project they have been working on, and make them spend all of that extra cash they have now on R&D. Oh wait, what extra cash? Isn’t this a consumer market? Aren’t Hybrids the most popular sellers now? We will do it naturally, Government GO AWAY.

Aug 30, 2010 12:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JSE_JSE wrote:
Not that I know what the writer was intending, but it seems like they’re citing CAFE standards which set a manufacturer’s fleet-wide fuel economy, not every individual vehicle’s MPG.

Aug 30, 2010 2:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.